From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AB96C4CECF for ; Mon, 23 Sep 2019 20:00:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A68F20820 for ; Mon, 23 Sep 2019 20:00:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2387525AbfIWUAg (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Sep 2019 16:00:36 -0400 Received: from fieldses.org ([173.255.197.46]:57986 "EHLO fieldses.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726777AbfIWUAg (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Sep 2019 16:00:36 -0400 Received: by fieldses.org (Postfix, from userid 2815) id 463A2150D; Mon, 23 Sep 2019 16:00:36 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2019 16:00:36 -0400 To: fstests@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: generic/495: swap on sparse file over NFS Message-ID: <20190923200036.GA5085@fieldses.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) From: bfields@fieldses.org (J. Bruce Fields) Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org I'm updating to a newer xfstests and seeing: generic/495 - output mismatch (see /root/xfstests-dev/results//generic/495.out.bad) --- tests/generic/495.out 2019-09-18 17:28:00.834721480 -0400 +++ /root/xfstests-dev/results//generic/495.out.bad 2019-09-20 13:34:01.1568 89741 -0400 @@ -1,5 +1,4 @@ QA output created by 495 File with holes -swapon: Invalid argument Empty swap file (only swap header) swapon: Invalid argument If I understand correctly, it's requiring swapon to fail on a sparse file, which isn't going to happen on NFS, where the sparsenes of the file isn't really the client's concern. Is it really correct to *require* swapon to fail in this case? --b.